And again, I say unto you, I remember my servant Oliver Granger; behold, verily, I say unto him that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord. (D&C 117:12)
Richard Packham, a critic of the LDS Church, wrote the following in his online paper, "Joseph Smith as a Prophet":
PROPHECY ABOUT OLIVER GRANGER: July 8, 1838. D&C 117:12-15. Revelation and prophecy regarding Oliver Granger: "his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord... let the blessings of my people be on him forever and ever."
FULFILLED?: Few Mormons know anything about Oliver Granger beyond this mention in the D&C, and most are even unaware of that. As far as the Mormon people are concerned, Oliver Granger has been forgotten, rather than "had in sacred remembrance ... forever and ever."
This post will examine this claim to false prophecy.
Firstly, as to who Oliver Granger was, the following comes from vol. 4 of Robinson and Garrett’s A Commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants, pp. 127-28:
12. Oliver Granger. Oliver Granger was a man of great integrity and great business skills who could have made himself wealthy had he not consecrated his time and talents to the service of the kingdom. Brother Granger had arrived in Far West in June 1838, but when Doctrine and Covenants 117 was received the following month, he was sent to Kirtland with a copy of that revelation for President Marks and Bishop Whitney. He remained in Kirtland conducting business for the First Presidency until October 1838, when he returned briefly to Far West. The exodus from Missouri prevented Granger from returning to Ohio until 1840, where he continued to conduct the business of the Church in Kirtland until his death on 25 August 1841. As long as the world stands, this revelation (D&C 117) and the Lord's glorious commendation of Oliver Granger will be sacred scripture for the Latter-day Saints.
13. The redemption of the First Presidency. This phrase refers to the financial redemption of the First Presidency and the restoration of their reputation for honesty, which Granger brought about by his skillful management of Church affairs in Ohio. Among several published tributes to the skill and integrity of Brother Granger is the following: "To all persons that are or may be interested. I, Horace Kingsbury, of Painsville township, Geauga county, and state of Ohio, feeling the importance of recommending to remembrance every worthy citizen who has by his conduct commended himself to personal acquaintance by his course of strict integrity, and desire for truth and common justice, feel it my duty to state that Oliver Granger's management in the arrangement of the unfinished business of people that have moved to the Far West, in redeeming their pledges and thereby sustaining their integrity, has been truly praiseworthy, and has entitled him to my highest esteem, and ever grateful recollection."
13. His sacrifice shall be more sacred unto me than his increase. Note the contrast between this praise for Oliver Granger and the rebuke of Brothers Marks and Whitney in verses 3 and 4. The latter two had been putting increase before their own obedience.
14. Unto the land of Zion. Granger attempted to establish his family in Far West in October 1838 but was driven out of the state by the Extermination Order of Governor Boggs. He moved back to Kirtland as Joseph Smith's business agent in 1840. There he died and is buried.
14. A merchant unto my name. Oliver Granger would remain "the Lord's businessman" for the remainder of his life. All his financial skills were consecrated to the Lord's name, and all his decisions and actions were made and done in the Lord's name.
16. And to overthrow the moneychangers. Faithful Saints were still living in Kirtland in the summer of 1838, and the stake was not disorganized there until 1841. Nevertheless, there were factions among those who professed to be Saints, and it was difficult to know who really was on the Lord's side. Many different parties struggled for control of the Kirtland Temple, and there were deep differences of opinion concerning its proper uses and function. Many Kirtland members thought of the temple as a financial resource and thus became "moneychangers." Note, for example, the disagreement over public "exhibitions" in the temple and Oliver Granger's correct refusal to hand over the temple keys to some Church leaders in Ohio who favored using the building for profane purposes.
The integrity Oliver Granger displayed in the early Church can be summed up in the following (History of the Church 3:350-51):
Monday, May 15.—I was engaged in general business at home and in transacting a variety of business with Brother Oliver Granger, and gave him the following letter:
A Letter of Recommendation to Oliver Granger from the First Presidency.
COMMERCE, ILLINOIS, 13th May, 1839.
Joseph Smith, Jun., Sidney Rigdon, and Hyrum Smith, presiding Elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby certify and solemnly declare unto all the Saints scattered abroad, and send unto them greeting: That we have always found President Oliver Granger to be a man of the most strict integrity and moral virtue; and in fine, to be a man of God.
We have had long experience and acquaintance with Brother Granger. We have entrusted vast business concerns to him, which have been managed skilfully to the support of our characters and interest as well as that of the Church; and he is now authorized by a general conference to go forth and engage in vast and important concerns as an agent for the Church, that he may fill a station of usefulness in obedience to the commandment of God, which was given unto him July $, 1838, which says, "Let him (meaning Brother Granger) contend earnestly for the redemption of the First Presidency of my Church, saith the Lord."
We earnestly solicit the Saints scattered abroad to strengthen his hands with all their might, and to put such means into his hands as shall enable him to accomplish his lawful designs and purposes, according to the commandments, and according to the instructions which he shall give unto them. And that they entrust him with moneys, lands, chattels, and goods, to assist him in this work; and it shall redound greatly to the interest and welfare, peace and satisfaction of my Saints, saith the Lord God, for this is an honorable agency which I have appointed unto him, saith the Lord. And again, verily, thus saith the Lord, I will lift up my servant Oliver, and beget for him a great name on the earth, and among my people, because of the integrity of his soul: therefore, let all my Saints abound unto him, with all liberality and long suffering, and it shall be a blessing on their heads.
We would say unto the Saints abroad, let our hearts abound with grateful acknowledgements unto God our Heavenly Father, who hath called us unto His holy calling by the revelation of Jesus Christ, in these last days, and has so mercifully stood by us, and delivered us out of the seventh trouble, which happened unto us in the State of Missouri. May God reward our enemies according to their works. We request the prayers of all the Saints, subscribing ourselves their humble brethren in tribulations, in the bonds of the everlasting Gospel.
JOSEPH SMITH, JUN.,
SIDNEY RIGDON,
HYRUM SMITH.
In his paper, "The Nature of Prophets and Prophecy," John A. Tvedtnes wrote the following about this allegedly false prophecy:
Several critics have pointed to D&C 117:12-15 as a “false prophecy” because Oliver Granger’s name is unfamiliar to most Latter-day Saints despite the fact that the Lord said “that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever” (verse 12). It seems unlikely that the memory of any mortal can be called “sacred,” so the words “sacred remembrance” most likely refer to the fact that the Lord would remember him. After all, the verse begins with the Lord saying, “I remember my servant Oliver Granger.”
There is much plausibility to Tvedtnes’ argument, especially the biblical precedent for such:
For the righteous will never be moved; they will be remembered forever (Psa 112:6 NRSV)
Truly I tell you, wherever this good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her. (Matt 26:13 NRSV)
In the above two texts, it is clear that the remembrance/memorial of these people is the “divine remembrance” concept, as proposed by Tvedtnes for Oliver Granger—God’s memory thereof, not man’s.
Indeed, often Yahweh in the Old Testament is said to “remember” things such as his covenant with people, showing this concept of divine remembrance. For a good discussion, see Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, especially his analysis of αναμνησις ("remembrance/memory") in Luke 22 and 1 Cor 11.
With respect to αναμησις, the term appears five times in the LXX. Four of these five instances are within the sense of priestly sacrifice; the exception is Wisdom of Solomon 16:6. The NRSV translates the verse as follows:
They were troubled for a little while as a warning, and received a symbol of deliverance to remind (αναμνησις) them of your law's command.
The other instances of this term in the LXX are Lev 24:7; Num 10:10; Psa 38:1 [LXX, 37:1] and 70:1 [LXX, 69:1]), translating the Hebrew terms אַזְכָּרָה(Lev 24:7); זִכָּרוֹן (Num 10:10) and הַזְכִּיר (Psa 38:1; 70:1). The NRSV captures the original language text rather well:
You shall put frankincense with each row, to be a token offering for the bread, as an offering (αναμνησις) by fire to the Lord. (Lev 24:7)
Also on your days of rejoicing, at your appointed festivals, and at the beginnings of your months, you shall blow the trumpets over your burnt offerings and over your sacrifices of well-being; they shall serve as a reminder (αναμνησις ) on your behalf before the Lord your God: I am the Lord your God. (Num 10:10)
A Psalm of David, for the memorial offering (αναμνησις). . . (Psa 38:1)
To the leader. Of David, for the memorial offering (αναμνησις). . . (Psa 70:1).
All of these are instances wherein God is “reminded” of His covenant via sacrifice.
Additional passages supporting the “divine remembrance” concept include:
And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. (Gen 9:15-16)
And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. (Exo 2:24)
And I have also heard the groaning of my children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant. (Exo 6:5)
Then I will remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember, and I will remember the land . . . but I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I am the Lord. (Lev 26:42, 45)
He hath remembered his covenant forever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. (Psa 105:8)
And he remembered for them his covenant, and repented according to the multitude of his mercies. (Psa 106:45)
Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee and everlasting covenant. (Ezek 16:60)
Thus he has shown the mercy promised to our ancestors, and has remembered his holy covenant. (Luke 1:72 NRSV)
The evidence discussed above can be summed up with the words of the psalmist:
Remember all thy offerings, and accept thy burnt sacrifice; Selah. (Psa 20:3)
All of this strongly supports Tvedtnes’ reading of D&C 117:12.
However, Richard Packham attempted to respond to Tvedtnes’ reading of this verse here. On the meaning of “sacred remembrance,” he wrote the following:
Tvedtnes' argument also suffers from the fact that the term "sacred remembrance" has frequently been used to refer to HUMAN remembrance: B. H. Roberts, in a Pioneer Day address in 1886 said (emphasis added in all quotations):
"My Brethren and Sisters: We have met on this occasion to bear witness to the world that we hold in sacred remembrance the entrance of the Pioneers into this region."
Joseph Smith said:
". . . our circumstances are calculated to awaken our spirits to a sacred remembrance of everything, ..." (DHC, Vol. 3, p. 290).
Writing from Liberty Jail, he wrote to Bishop Partridge:
"Our situation is calculated to awaken our minds to a sacred remembrance of your affection" (Times & Seasons, 1:7:99).
Later in the same letter he wrote:
"... [we] send our respects to fathers, mothers, wives, and children, brothers and sisters, and be assured we hold them in sacred remembrance." (HoC 3:297-298)
In a letter to Major-General Law (August 14, 1842) he wrote:
"And will not those who come after hold our names in sacred remembrance?" (HoC 5:94)
Orson Pratt, in commenting on Ezekiel 37:11, said
"...in other words, our forefather, whose children we are, and whose names are held in sacred remembrance by us, are all dead." (JoD 20:17).
Firstly, the impression that Packham is trying to give (that all instance of "[sacred] remembrance" refers to human, not divine, remembrance) is fallacious. Note D&C 127:9, dated September 1, 1842:
And again, let all the records be had in order, that they may be put in the archives of my holy temple to be held in remembrance from generation to generation, saith the Lord of Hosts.
Furthermore, it ignores the biblical evidence of God “remembering” things, as discussed previously, language which did influence early Latter-day Saints.
Finally, Packham’s argument suffers from a structural fallacy, that of the excluded middle. If one maps out his argument, it would go something like this:
First Premise: Some instance of "[sacred] remembrance" refers to human remembrance.
Second Premise: D&C 117:12 contains the term, "sacred remembrance."
Conclusion: D&C 117:12 refers to human remembrance.
To those familiar with formal logic, the fallacy is evident: the fallacy of undistributed middle. This means that the predicates in both the major and minor premises do not exhaust all the occurrences of "[sacred] remembrance," and would not necessitate the interpretation of "human remembrance" as Packham argues for. At best, it could refer to human remembrance, but the evidence discussed in this study shows that this is not the most exegetically sound reading.
Further support for this understanding of "sacred remembrance" comes from JST Mark 14:8:
KJV | 1867 Inspired Version (RLDS) |
She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying. | She has dome what she could, and this which she has done unto me, shall be had in remembrance in generations to come, wheresoever my gospel shall be preached; for verily she has come beforehand to anoint my body to the burying. |
New Testament Manuscript 2, Folio 2, p. 39:
For? she hath wrought a good work on me. Ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever you will, you may do them good; but me ye have not always, She has done what she could, and this which she has done unto me, shall be had in rememberence in generations to come, wheresoever my gospel is <shall be> preached; the she has come affore <before> hand to anoit my bo=dy to the burying.
According to "Time Sequence of the New Translation" in Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible: Electronic Library (2010), Mark 9:2-John 5:29 was produced between November 20, 1831, and February 16, 1832.
While much more could be said, it should be evident that this is not a false prophecy. As with so many issues, the critics are on an exegetical fishing trip and have forgotten the fishing poles.
Further Reading: